Michel Paradis

“Why the Collapse of Al-Nashiri’s Defense Team Matters” Lawfare

Michel Paradis explores the recent resignation of the lead defense counsel for Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is being tried by a military commission for the bombing of the USS Cole. Paradis examines the ethical and confidentiality reasons why the defense counsel was forced to resign and what this could mean for military commissions moving forward.

This article explains the Supreme Court’s recent decision not to hear a pre-trial challenge to military commissions brought by Abd al Rahim al Nashiri, a death penalty defendant on trial by a military commission for the bombing of the USS Cole. Michel Paradis offers his view on the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision on military commission going forward.

“How Protecting Robert Mueller Could Harm Him” Lawfare

In this article, Michel Paradis analyzes the Constitutional and legal challenges that could arise if several bills contemplated by the Senate meant to protect Special Counsel Robert Mueller from impeachment were passed. Paradis explores how challenges to these bills could both harm the regulatory protections already safeguarding Mueller’s position and lead to protracted legal fights that harm the efficacy and legitimacy of Mueller’s work.

“Why Transgender Service Members Will Win in Court” Lawfare

In this article, Michel Paradis lays out his opinion as to why a challenge to any ban on military service by people who are transgender would be likely to succeed and defeat the ban. In particular, Paradis explains how the government’s previous, successful defense of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell may ironically provide the legal basis for defeating potential transgender bans.

In this article, Michel Paradis discusses the theory that members of the Trump campaign could be prosecuted for espionage under the 1917 Espionage Act over their meeting with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower.

“Guantánamo lawyer: Military tribunals are built on American apartheid.” America Magazine

Michel Paradis argues that the military tribunals at Guantánamo are a form of legal apartheid that creates a separate and substandard legal system for non-citizens. Paradis says the Guantánamo trials are a “laboratory for the bare minimum of due process that the public can be convinced to accept” and that a functioning legal system “depends on a shared confidence in the norms that give judges, courts and law their power to protect us.”

“This Week at the Military Commissions, 3/21 Session: “Who is Greg Sansig?”” Lawfare

Lawfare reports on the March 21 session of the military commissions for Guantanamo detainees. One of the motions presented by Cheryl Bormann, a defense attorney for a detainee, concerns Greg Sansig, an individual whose involvement in the case is unknown yet. Sansig has permission to view privileged defense files for Bormann’s case and others. Another attorney, Michel Paradis was able to track down Sansig but did not receive any answers. The motion aims to uncover what happened.

“C.I.A. Torture Detailed in Newly Disclosed Documents” The New York Times

The New York Times reports that newly released documents go into more detail about CIA torture techniques. Lawyers for two detainees subjected to extreme “enhanced interrogation” are asking federal judges to obtain a copy of the report to ensure that it is preserved as Trump takes office. Michel Paradis, the lawyer for Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, argued that a copy of the report deposited in the National Archives was insufficient as it could be withdrawn or destroyed. A federal judge has ordered the Obama administration to provide a copy of the report to the court.

The nation’s second-highest court on Thursday upheld the conviction of a Guantanamo Bay detainee, siding with the government in a case that tested the power of the military tribunal system. At oral arguments before the full court, Justice Department lawyers urged the judges to “be wary of setting outer bounds” that curtail military tribunals at Cuba’s Guantanamo Bay. Bahlul’s lawyer said that the government’s position would allow military tribunals to usurp the traditional role of civilian courts in handling domestic crimes. “The political branches have replaced judicial power with a military trial chamber,” Bahlul’s attorney, Michel Paradis, told the court late last year.

What’s Driving the Passion Behind JASTA?LawFare Blog

Michel Paradis writes that the hardest argument to ignore when it comes to the Justice Against Sponsored Terrorism Act (JASTA) has been from the victims of the September 11th attack. The moral and political clout of this group is unquestionably why a Congress that cannot pass a routine budget was able to overwhelmingly override a presidential veto to ensure that JASTA became law. Paradis argues that the failure to bring the perpetrators of September 11th into a real courtroom for the past fifteen years has meant that the victims’ families and the country as a whole have been denied this opportunity for a battle-tested truth, and as a result, denied the opportunity for closure.

"Geeking Out on Al-Nashiri with Michel Paradis and Bob Loeb" Lawfare Podcast

Michel Paradis joined Bob Loeb and Benjamin Wittes on the Lawfare Podcast to discuss the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeal's recent ruling in the Al-Nashiri case. This discussion follows the ins and outs of the court's ruling from both a legal and a policy perspective.

"Sailor Accused of Spying for China Could Dodge Trial," The Daily Beast, April 28, 2016.

A Navy sailor charged with sharing classified information to Taiwan and China—allegations that carry a potential life sentence in prison—could still avoid a full military trial. The situation is complicated, says Paradis, by "a number of other people in the decision-making process whose priorities are not aligned with criminal prosecution.”

"UNDER THE RADAR" POLITICO

“Judges on a federal appeals court sounded open Wednesday to halting military commission proceedings against a Saudi man alleged to have planned the attack on the USS Cole, which killed 17 American sailors.” Mr. Paradis was the attorney defending the accused individual. He noted that there is good reason not to define all kinds of violence as hostilities. "The law of war swings both ways," he said. If it's a war, "it's perfectly legal for them to shoot back."

Attorney Michel Paradis, counsel to the foreign terrorist seized in 2002 who’s now awaiting trial before a U.S. military commission at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, is optimistic about his client's chances for a civilian appeal in the distant future.